General population survey estimates of the overall prevalence of problem drinking and drug we in a community are biased by the exclusion of non-household populations.
Estimates based on compiling prevalences in community institutions may also be biased due to over-counting of users of more than one institution.
This paper examines prevalence estimates derived from probability samples of problem drinkers in the general population and within alcohol treatment, drug treatment, mental health, criminal justice and welfare agencies in a single US county.
Data sets are merged and weighted to reflect a community sample of institutions, and a 17% subset of cases is identified within the institutional samples that are not living in housing units typically inclucled in general population sampling frames.
The difference in prevalences of problem drinking in the household and non-household populations is found to be large : 11% and 48%, respectively.
Even greater differences are founcl between estimates of unprescribed weekly drug we (6% and 47%, respectively) and combined problem drinking and weekly drug use (2% and 27%, respectively).
This suggests that confining samples to the household population can systematically under-represent the prevalence of problem drinking and drug use.
A second source of bias in prevalences is characteristic of studies using records from multiple institutions.
Mots-clés Pascal : Alcoolisme, Prévalence, Epidémiologie, Biais méthodologique, Echantillonnage, Démographie, Homme
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Alcoholism, Prevalence, Epidemiology, Methodological bias, Sampling, Demography, Human
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 95-0197821
Code Inist : 002B18C05B. Création : 09/06/1995.